Keeping Children Safe in Education 2025

[WeMeetInFairIthilien]

The delayed KCSIE (keeping children safe in education) statutory guidance has been confirmed to be released this month, almost 2 months later than normal.

'The Department for Education this morning revealed the document – which gets updated each year – will include links to latest relationships, sex and health education guidance and “revised guidance on gender-questioning children”.

KCSIE sets out the legal duties schools “must follow to safeguard and promote the welfare of children and young people under the age of 18”."
https://schoolsweek.co.uk/dfe-promises-delayed-kcsie-guidance-this-month/

It is usually released in May or June, so running really late.

All school staff (from the Head teacher to the cleaners, site staff, office and catering staff have to complete statutory training in KCSIE every Sepember. At my school, we also have to complete a test and get a certificate to prove that we know what the changes are each year.

Last year, the section on LGBT children was changed to LGB and gender questioning. However, this remained a "draft" section all year.

It will be interesting to see what comes out. Hoping it will be in the next 3 weeks, so that schools can look at it before the summer break. Otherwise, the DSL (Designated Safeguarding Lead) will be having to do more work over the holidays, ready to lead training on Sept 1st.

As an aside, the South West NASWUT diversity and inclusion group have invited us to training in how to be better allies, as "you may be able to save lives".

Looks like it won’t change much this year:

https://safeguarding.network/kcsie

Perhaps not, but it will be interesting to see if the 2024 guidance on LGB and gender questioning children will be changed from just being a "draft"

Thank you for posting, OP.

Last year, the section on LGBT children was changed to LGB and gender questioning. However, this remained a "draft" section all year.

This section of the 2024 guidance isn't draft but unfortunately several schools seem to be acting as if it is.

It has a reference to the draft Gender Questioning Children guidance and (like the section on Prevent) it says that it is "under review". But there is nothing that says it's draft.

I can't imagine any schools arguing that they can ignore the Prevent section but there are definitely those saying that they don't need to follow paras 205-209 "because it's draft". One example being my children's school.

Governors have to keep their KCSE training up to date too. Needs watching to make sure any outside consultants offering the training don't misinterpret it to suit an agenda. Has been known.

The significant thing seems to be that it is expected to contain links to revised guidance on Relationships, Sex, and Health Education and revised guidance on gender questioning children.

Those will be the interesting documents and the fact that they are linked to by KCSIE makes them de facto statutory?

One would hope that the linked draft guidance documents, gender questioning children and also one on prevent, are not draft and all references to “draft” are changed and made clear they are part of kcsie.

As the term draft has led many to read it as “ignore.” I asked a friend who is a judge and she said it’s there in statutory terms so it’s statutory.

Hopefully the revised guidance on Gender Questioning children will be a game changer. They'll have to specify single sex changing rooms, toilets etc in line with both the SC & education law.

It must retain the insistence on parental involvement - although the practice of schools transitioning children in secret has never been challenged in the courts, my understanding of safeguarding / education law is that keeping these secrets from parents is legally unjustifiable.

Fingers crossed the adults in government / DfE have been in charge of this rather than the gender loons.

It must retain the insistence on parental involvement

Yes. But hopefully they'll take it a step further and recognise that some parents are sanctioning their child's transition based on misinformation, including misinformation about suicide risk (although their child may well have been signposted towards suicide e.g. "if I don't transition my life won't be worth living and I'll be more likely to kill myself") and how well/badly evidenced medical interventions are.

I fear that will take longer. For that to happen all social workers and Ed psychs etc would need to fully understand and recognise the issues there. With regards to elements of fabricated illness by proxy etc

I’ve been listening to the awful case of Paloma Shemirani on bbc sounds / conspiracy land 2. Mother Kate persuaded her to refuse treatment for cancer, for which she’d have had a really good survival chance. She died. Mother was well known during Covid for spreading disinformation. She’s since made lots of money from snake oil on cancer patients and selling fake vaccine cards etc .

in a later episode an expert social worker talks through the issues with current law around coercion and pressure from people close to an individual- it’s over 10
years old and predates knowledge and law around coercion. There are some parallels around medical disinformation and group think / beliefs, except that in the case of gender shit it’s more deeply embedded across society.

there’s also this case I read today - new laws and convictions around encouraging self harm. It would be unlikely to apply to gender medicine, though Keira Bell has already had success there.

we’ve a very long way to go, however, before this way of thinking about it could be seen as something that needs to be actively addressed within children’s services and education.

especially when there are schools allowing/ encouraging male teachers to introduce themselves to their y2 class as non binary and Mx. https://x.com/journalistjill/status/1940730038988472450?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/brand/m001mssm?partner=uk.co.bbc&origin=share-mobile

Also things like this that I’ve just seen on Twitter:

https://x.com/katarinahill2/status/1941031085603016880?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

“I have a friend in a senior position in a counselling charity. She told me gender confused children were repeating the same lines to staff, but when staff went deeper the children didn't know what to say. Like they had just learned the phrases..”

its obviously anecdotal but Ritchie Heron has described these “scripts” many times before

we’ve a very long way to go, however, before this way of thinking about it could be seen as something that needs to be actively addressed within children’s services and education.

Sadly, I think you're right. Thank you for all of the information above.

I guess we may make short hops there. For example, if a school becomes aware that a parent is procuring puberty blockers, they may now see that as a red flag about how well-informed the parent is.

It's obviously also going to take time to unpick the motivation of this type of parent, especially so when the presumed start point is that they are being supportive and kind regarding their child's "gender". Presumably most will genuinely believe that they are well-informed as well as kind - and they've got health professionals telling them that they are.

For that to happen all social workers and Ed psychs etc would need to fully understand and recognise the issues there.

This ⬆️ is the frontline. I would like to see what's written in KCSIE currently (paras 205-209) uplifted into the Working Together to Safeguard Children guidance. Specifically a) the significant difference in risk between being LGB and gender questioning b) recognising that a gender questioning child may have underlying issues such as autism which need understanding.

Educational Psychologists should be able to unpick this. But unfortunately they seem fully captured.

Whatever it says, it got to be followed as it's the bible of safeguarding. So anything in reality not point worrying either way. It's not negotiatable once published.

There's zero room for personal views at this level or the entire doc becomes worthless.

Whatever my personal views are on the subject surely that's got to be separated out? For lobbying or complaints offline.

This was the case in my DC's infant school.

June 2021, a male HTLA decided to be non-binary. The year group he worked with, had an entire afternoon assembly on how he was to be called Mx and they.

The first I heard about it was in 2022, when my year 1 DD was telling me about her phonics group, lead by McSandwich (named changes, but similar sounds). I was really surprised to hear my 5 year old name a teacher without their title, but she couldn't explain why. Later in 2022, I saw it written down in the staff list for the first time. Mx Andwich.

In 2022-2023, the male HTLA was the full time class teacher maternity cover for a year 2 class.

He left in 2024, I don't know where he was going.

A few of us challenged some of the more extreme GI that was being taught to infant school children (anyone can be a boy, just a feeling in your head) and in the junior school (using "My Dad's a She" as a compulsory reading comprehension book, every day for a week in LBTQ+ History month). Plus, alao teaching that 'gender' was a protected characteristic and not 'sex'.

Now he as gone, things have calmed down a little.

Oh, and after I raised the issues with the DSL, and got no reply, I then posted on the year group WhatsApp about my concerns about their teaching the Equality Act incorrectly, the school then contacted all parents, telling us we were not allowed to complain about the school on social media. The school then phone me and threatened me with the police, if I defamed them.

I had a very long running thread on it, under a different name, but was located.

So, I've got an interest in this from both sides of the fence - science teacher and mum to children in a school with TRA staff.

One of the issues with safeguarding is that situations are often unclear . So discussion, interpretations, nuance etc are always part of deciding whether a situation's abusive or not - which happen under the framework of KCSIE but it's not a straightforward checklist of "this is abuse and this isn't".

I think we're still a long way from society acknowledging that children are being groomed into believing their bodies are flawed but a sex change will cure them. And that parents / adults pushing transgender ideology are being harmful - including the Munchausen transitioning of little children by their parents.

The ease with which dangerous adults were able to capture and impose their niche ideological beliefs on all our safeguarding and educational institutions has been horrific - and we're not yet out of the woods with this. They're embedded and refusing to give up the power they have.

But I do have some optimism - parents are much more prepared to to stand up and protest about this than they were.

That sounds horrific - I think I recall your previous thread.
I noticed on the AIBU thread about the non binary teacher that there were countless parents saying that little children weren't there to validate a man's narcissistic views about himself.

i completely forgot to link to his case here, apologies. It was on the bbc app this morning but I can’t see it now. But this is the cps write up:

https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/prison-term-legal-first-prosecution-man-who-encouraged-vulnerable-woman-commit-serious

bloody hell. They seem to be aiming for the younger kids too. Or send, from what I’ve heard here and there. Less likely to take the piss, question or refuse to use the language. (Some children with autism who are also very astute may push back of course.)

Yes but in this case you'd flag it up the line. You can't ignore kcsie. Isn't it the same as FMG? If you was in a culture where it was standard you want to ignore kcsie if you saw signs as your a firm beliver in FGM. I just think like it or not you leave opinions at the door. You flag up your concerns.

I don't agree it's up to interpretation. It should be followed. All side concerns you flag up.

Like if a kids comes in covered with bruises and filthy clothes. SC pick it up. You have no power in what happens next. Even if that's nothing as is so often the case. You just flag it and escalate again.

Even if you very anti trans unless your the DSL your superior will follow kcsie. When kids like Sara S die, people look to blame. Did you do your statutory duty? You can do more ie follow kcsie and flag concerns but imo never less.

yes you flag and report and flag and report

these days with electronic records such as Cpoms etc it’s much easier to access a history. Some of those histories will make interesting reading in this context.

however, it’s those higher up who then make further decisions. Stephen Flagherty reported the fact that the college had socially transitioned a girl without the mother’s knowledge or consent, after 2024 kcsie was published. He lost his job for following guidelines.

search his name and Nottingham college and you can find details of his claim against them

He lost his job for telling the mother that the college had socially transitioned the girl.

KCSiE expressly states this is a parental responsibility

He lost his job for telling the mother that the college had socially transitioned the girl.

KCSiE expressly states this is a parental responsibility

I believe an update has been released today